books Archives - American Wordsmith

The Atheist Nun

So why share all of these etiquette videos? Well, this was my way of tiptoeing into the moral arena while gaining enough courage to discuss my personal beliefs more directly online. Do I think I’m ready now? No, but I’m going to put it out there anyway since morality has been at the core of my being from childhood and only grows stronger with time. This is why the topic can be so touchy for me and anyone else who holds their morals close to their chest.

I am also tired of the thirty-second bits that people shout out to add their voice to the ever-growing chatter of “the news.” People come away with extremely shallow and tribalistic views if they cannot fully hear either position expressed. Therefore, the art of etiquette and the rules of civility that I posted were meant to stand as a welcome reminder to adults coming to my channel that one must first listen before they are heard.

That is why I appreciate having a channel where I can sit in a quiet room, write out my thoughts, and then deliver them without fear of being shouted over. I believe this is also why you don’t hear many women speaking out in the “public sphere” for fear of such shouting matches. Even though, historically, women have been seen as the moral guides within the home, and I wish to continue that tradition. I, personally, am too delicate to be mowed over by the loudest voices in the room. I would never be heard that way in this current culture.

And why, you may ask, for the changed name of my channel? That is all thanks to my brother, who always tells me the truth, even when it may not be flattering (heck, more so if it’s unflattering) to me. But I guess that’s just what siblings do.

Anyway, not too long ago, my brother texted me and called me an “atheist nun” in jest because I have always taken life so seriously and the smallest things seem to upset me. I was often told growing up that I “can’t take a joke.” But it’s because of this view of the world—the details, the small transgressions—that Man makes in his day-to-day life that I can see eating away at his own happiness that bothers me. I love people but hate when they sabotage themselves. And sabotage is much easier to do when you’re begging forgiveness from a father figure that’s watching your every move. I truly believe that if you focus on yourself and the way you interact with the world, you’ll eventually find happiness.

I heard Ben Shapiro talking a few months ago about how materialistic and small worshipping nature is—that God produces a much mightier and holier conception of the world for Man. But as I’ve spoken about in previous episodes, a writer gets his words and ideas from the details (also known as inductive reasoning) to come to grand conclusions. It’s the nature that’s around us—reality—that makes my flesh tingle, not some big man in the sky.

I suppose I’m still figuring out how I can truly help people through this platform. In some ways, I’d really like to help people see morality as something that can be discussed more scientifically than returning to preaching scenes from the Bible. I want to find those people out there who also like homesteading and ballet and learning new things and enjoying family without the sermons at the end.

I am sure that it will take more episodes to fully understand the seeming paradox of a name like “The Atheist Nun,” but for now I have opened up the conversation, I hope. And in the most fleshed-out way, I am a person without faith who finds a kind of spirituality in humanity and the morals that keep us on the true path to happiness.

And finally, please leave your comments and thoughts. I don’t mean to appear intense or intimidating; apparently, I just come off this way because of my drive to see myself and others do well. Additionally, here’s an important disclaimer: I will be very careful not to try to tease out other living people’s thoughts on this channel, other than my own, when discussing morality in order to avoid what Ayn Rand calls “psychologizing.” This term is essentially used to mean judging others for merely their thoughts or subconscious motives. It is unfair for me to try to weasel into another’s mind and presume to know why they feel what they feel or why they do what they do—only they know that. I can only look at the actions that they took or the words consciously communicated either orally or written down, and only then can a moral judgment be made.

At the end of the day, I know we can do better as a society if we let go of the notion that we are not responsible for our own destinies, or that some deity or deities control every aspect of our lives, or that life is completely up to chance. We have free will, and the greatest teachers are shut up in books building up dust. I want people to blow off those cobwebs, crack open the best minds, and peer into their honest, naked thoughts. Take the time to digest them and integrate admirable minds into your own to become the kind of person that is never forgotten by time.

_____________________________________________________________

Views Expressed Disclaimer: The postings on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent the postings, strategies, or opinions of American Wordsmith, LLC. Please also know that while I consider myself an Objectivist and my work is inspired by Objectivism, it is not nor should it be considered Objectivist since I am not the creator of the philosophy. For more information about Ayn Rand’s philosophy visit: aynrand.org.

Excerpts from Manners for Men by Mrs. Humphry, 1897

I will be sharing several interesting excerpts from the books that I have been reading as of late. This one is an etiquette book for gentlemen written by Mrs. Humphry, a late Victorian novelist, in 1897 entitled Manners for Men. I will also put the link to the full text at the end of the excerpts if you want to read the complete work.

Let’s begin.

Apart from faults of temper, men fall into careless habits of speech and manner at home, and one form of this, viz., habitually using strong language in the presence of women and children, is particularly offensive. Besides, it defeats itself; for if the forcible expressions are intended to express disapprobation, they soon become weak and powerless to do so, because they are used on every possible occasion. After a time they lose all meaning.

***

The strict rule is that when walking with a lady a man should never leave her side.

***

Sometimes ladies are very anxious to take the reins and drive themselves, a circumstance which has often occasioned agonies of nervousness to other women on the coach. It is quite possible to refuse such a request in a polite and gentlemanly way, partly by seeming to ignore it or laughing it off.

***

The old-fashioned rule that a man must approach the father of a girl before offering himself in marriage to her has now, to some extent, died out.

***

The usual way to ask for the admired one’s hand in marriage is in person. This is always preferable to writing, though some men have not the courage to adopt the first course.

Should the lady accept the offer, the happy wooer must take the earliest opportunity of seeing her father, or, failing him, her nearest friend, and begging him to permit the engagement. Should he consent, all is well; but in the contrary case, his decision must be accepted.

***

Immediately upon having the engagement ratified, the accepted suitor gives the lady an engagement ring. This should be as handsome a present as he can afford to buy. Together with all other presents and correspondence on both sides, this ring must be returned if the engagement should be broken off.

***

No man should drag a girl into a long engagement. Nor should any man propose to a girl until he is in a position to provide for her.

He is only standing in the way of other wooers who may be well supplied with this world’s gear. Such trifles as wealth and ease may appear as nought to the mind of the youthful lover, not to be weighed for a moment in the balance with love and young romance. The girl, too, may be of the same way of thinking at the time, but it the more behoves the man, the stronger, to consider her and to remember that poverty is such a bitter and a cruel thing that it even kills love at times.

***

Custom demands that the bridegroom shall present her bouquet to the bride, as well as bouquets and a present each to the bridesmaids. He must furnish the house for the bride in every detail, not excepting the house and table linen, which, in the old days of spinning-wheels, was wont to be contributed by the bride herself.

He must provide the wedding ring and the carriage in which his best man and himself go to church. He pays the fees to clergyman and clerk, but it is the best man who hands them over. With him the bridegroom waits at the altar till the bride arrives. She takes her place at his left hand for the first time, and at the proper moment he produces the ring which is the symbol of their union.

The usual dress of a bridegroom consists of a very dark blue frock-coat, light trousers, light or white scarf-tie, patent boots, and a new hat.

***

Addresses of Letters.

Her Majesty the Queen.

To His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales.

To Her Royal Highness the Princess of Wales.

This same form is used in addressing communications to all other members of the Royal Family, adding the title where the word “Prince” or “Princess” would be incorrect, as:—

To His Royal Highness the Duke of York.

To Her Royal Highness the Duchess of York.

Below the rank of royalty there is the distinction between letters addressed by persons on an equality with those to whom formal and they write, and by inferiors.

***

Address for the envelope—formal and informal.

I shall call them formal and informal, and range them in separate lines.

Informal. Formal.
The Duke of —— To His Grace the Duke of ——
The Duchess of —— To Her Grace the Duchess of ——
The Marquis of —— To the Most Honourable the Marquis of ——
The Marchioness of ——    To the Most Honourable the Marchioness of ——
The Earl of —— To the Right Honourable the Earl of ——
The Countess of —— To the Right Honourable the Countess of ——
The Viscount —— The Right Honourable the Viscount ——
The Viscountess —— The Right Honourable the Viscountess ——
Lord —— The Right Honourable Lord —— or Baron ——
Lady —— The Right Honourable Lady —— or Baroness—

***

Addressing Privy Councillors.

Members of the Privy Council are also addressed as “Right Honourable,” in the same way as Peers. In this case the names of commoners are not followed by the abbreviation “Esq.,” as:—

The Right Honourable James Balfour, M.P.

***

Ambassadors.

Ambassadors and their wives are addressed as “His Excellency,” “Her Excellency,” the personal and official titles following the word, as:—

To His Excellency the Earl of——, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to France.

To Her Excellency the Countess of——.

Other official personages are addressed in the following way:—

To His Excellency Lord Blank, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland.

To His Grace the Archbishop of——.

The Right Reverend the Bishop of——.

The Very Reverend the Dean of——.

***

Degrees.

Academical distinctions are indicated by the initials placed after the name—LL.D. for Doctor of Laws and Learning, D.D. for Doctor of Divinity and so on.

***

Beginning the letter.

So much for the envelopes. The proper way to begin letters is as follows. As I have mentioned, the Queen is addressed as “Madam” in the inside of a letter. A gentleman writing

***

To the Queen.

to the Queen would sign himself, “I have the honour to submit myself, with profound respect, Your Majesty’s most devoted subject and servant.” Above the word “Madam” should be written “Her Majesty the Queen.” Lord Beaconsfield struck out a line of his own and in writing to the Queen began, “Mr. Disraeli,” continuing in the third person and addressing Her Majesty in the second.

***

To the Prince and Princess of Wales.

The Prince of Wales is addressed as “Sir,” above this word being written “To His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales.” Persons on intimate terms sometimes begin “Sir” or “Dear Prince,” others “My dear Prince.” The Princess of Wales is occasionally addressed by friends as “My dear Princess.” The two orthodox endings to such letters are respectively “Your Royal Highness’s dutiful and obedient servant,” or (a humbler style) “Your Royal Highness’s dutiful and most obedient servant.” To all other Royal Princes and Princesses the ending would be “Most Humble and Obedient Servant.”

***

To a Duke and Duchess.

Dukes other than royal are addressed inside letters by intimates as “Dear Duke,” by others “My Lord Duke, may it please your Grace.” In writing to a Duchess her title is placed above the “Madam.” In formal letters Marquises would be addressed as “My Lord Marquis.”

***

On omitting christian names from courtesy titles.

A very common form of mistake is that of omitting the Christian name from the courtesy titles of the sons and daughters of dukes, marquises, and earls. The sons have the title “Lord” prefixed to the Christian and surname: for instance, “Lord Alfred Osborne,” “Lord Henry Somerset.” It is extremely incorrect to call either of these “Lord Osborne” or “Lord Somerset.” The daughters of dukes, marquises and earls have the title “Lady” before their Christian and surname; “Lady Emily Heneage,” for instance, must not be addressed as “Lady Heneage.” Should she marry a commoner only the surname is altered, the “Lady Emily” remains. This may all appear a little involved to those unaccustomed to titles, but neglect of these forms indicates very clearly a lack of savoir faire. It is a source of great annoyance to the owners of courtesy titles to have the Christian name omitted. Anybody, even a knight’s wife, may be a “Lady Smith” or “Jones”; the insertion of the Christian name before the “Smith” or “Jones” means that the possessor is the daughter of a duke, marquis, or earl.

***

Beginning a letter to the above.

In beginning a letter to any of the above a stranger would say “Dear Lady Mary Smith,” but the usual form would be “Dear Lady Mary.” Inferiors would begin by writing the lady’s title over the word “Madam,” or merely beginning “Madam” and writing the title at the end of the letter.

***

To an ambassador with conclusion.

In writing to an ambassador or his wife the title is placed above the word “Sir” or “Madam.” Inferiors would write “May it please your Excellency,” and would conclude with “I have the honour to be Your Excellency’s most humble, obedient servant.”

***

An archbishop.

In writing to an archbishop a correspondent would begin “Your Grace,” ending, “I remain Your Grace’s most obedient servant.”

***

A bishop.

To a bishop the form would be, “My Lord,” or “Right Reverend Sir,” or “May it please Your Lordship,” the last being, of course, the humblest form of address. The conclusion would be, I remain, “My Lord” (or “Right Reverend Sir”) “Your most obedient servant.”

***

A dean.

The beginning of a letter to a dean would be, “Reverend Sir” or “Mr. Dean,” the title of all these dignitaries being, in formal letters, indited above the beginning. Those having slight acquaintance would begin, “Dear Mr. Dean.” Strangers would end the letter, “I have the honour to be Your most obedient servant.”

***

Doctors of Divinity.

Doctors of divinity are addressed as “Reverend Sir,” as well as archdeacons and all other clergy.

Intimates would begin letters to the above with: “Dear Archbishop,” “Dear Bishop,” “Dear Dean,” or “Dear Doctor.”

***

Officers in the army.

With the sole exception of lieutenants in the army, all officers have their military rank prefixed to their name. Ensigns and lieutenants are addressed as “Esq.”

And navy.

***

Letters of condolence.

A very unusual fault committed is to begin by dilating upon the shock or grief felt by the writer. The absurdity of this becomes apparent when one compares mentally the shock or grief as felt by the recipient. Two lines conveying the expression of sympathy are better than pages of even the most eloquent composition. Mourners require all their fortitude at times of loss, and anything likely to impair their self-command is the reverse of a kindness.

***

In this connection it may be as well to remark that about a week after the funeral it is customary to call and leave cards of inquiry. When these are responded to by cards of thanks for inquiries, it is a sign that the family is willing to receive callers.

***
Link: https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/53262

_____________________________________________________________

Excerpts from A Word to Women by Mrs. Humphry, 1898

I am learning to embrace my unique lifestyle by reading more about the Victorian era, a period in which I find most of my favorite art and some of the most amazing inventions. Perhaps our historic, Queen Anne-styled home has rubbed off on me too, as I am surrounded by its beauty every day. Hopefully, learning what a middle-class Victorian woman did in the home will help guide me on my own journey through life.

I will be sharing several interesting excerpts from the books that I have been reading as of late. This one is an etiquette book for ladies written by Mrs. Humphry, a late Victorian novelist, in 1898 entitled A Word to Women. I will also put the link to the full text at the end of the excerpts if you want to read the complete work.

Let’s begin.

His wife is an education to him…

***

The ideal girl is she who combines with high culture a love of the domestic and a desire to please.

***

It is good to encourage the love of simple pleasures. It is the way to keep our souls from shrinking.

***

To possess a grateful spirit is to increase the happiness of life.

***

It is good to teach young people to appreciate the infinite, everyday pleasures that surround them. It adds immensely to their happiness…

***

To grow old is tragic, especially for women.

***

And as one of Nature’s decrees is that which causes us to adjust ourselves to altered surroundings after change or loss, we accept the altered circumstances, and allow our thoughts and feelings to grow round what is left to us.

***

We were surely meant to be happy, we humans, so indomitable is the inclination towards joyfulness under circumstances the most adverse. It is easy enough in youth, and even the sceptic, the pessimist, the cynic, if they live long enough, will find that it is not so very difficult in middle age, when scepticism, pessimism, and cynicism are apt to be outgrown. There lies the true secret of the matter. There is a joy in growth, and we must see to it that we do not cheat ourselves of it. Stunted natures are seldom happy ones, and their middle age is merely mental shrinkage, with a narrowing of the heart and a corresponding drought in all the sources of joy.

***

Sometimes two who have loved each other in their youth meet again when middle age has come to both. Such a meeting can never be commonplace to either. Nor do the two see each other as they are visible to ordinary acquaintances. In the eyes of memory, the grey hair is replaced by the sunny locks of youth; the saddened eyes are bright again and eagerly out-looking into a world of abundant promise; the worn and furrowed brow becomes smooth and white, the pale cheeks touched with youthful bloom; and with a delicious sense of reciprocity each knows that the lost youth of both is present to the mind of either.

***

But time gives us all something in return; a growing patience which brings sweetness and gentleness in its train; a wider outlook on the world and a deeper insight into the hearts of friends; a tender sympathy with those who suffer, and a truer sense of comradeship with our fellow-travellers on life’s road. And all these things write themselves clearly enough on the ageing faces, sometimes beautifying what once was almost destitute of charm; and sometimes spiritualising what once was beautiful in form and colour, but lacked the loveliness that results from an equal balance of mind and heart.

***

The Boy’s Lament

“What can a boy do, and where can a boy stay,
If he always is told to get out of the way?
He cannot sit here, and he mustn’t stand there,
The cushions that cover that gaily-decked chair
Were put there, of course, to be seen and admired;
A boy has no business to feel a bit tired.
The beautiful carpets with blossom and bloom
On the floor of the tempting and light-shaded room,
Are not made to be walked on—at least, not by boys.
The house is no place, anyway, for their noise.

.

There’s a place for the boys. They will find it somewhere,
And if our own homes are too daintily fair
For the touch of their fingers, the tread of their feet,
They’ll find it, and find it, alas! in the street,
’Mid the gildings of sin and the glitter of vice;
And with heartaches and longings we pay a dear price
For the getting of gain that our lifetime employs
If we fail in providing a place for our boys.

.

Though our souls may be vexed with the problems of life,
And worn with besetments and toiling and strife,
Our hearts will keep younger—your tired heart and mine—
If we give them a place in our innermost shrine;
And till life’s latest hour ’twill be one of our joys
That we keep a small corner—a place for the boys.”

***
Link: https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/36330

_____________________________________________________________

Chronology: Lansing’s Life and Works

1994 3 January: Kaitlyn (Lansing/Bankson) Quis born, North Hempstead, New York, eldest child of a music teacher, Radomir Quis, and a copywriter, Anita Chaudhry, who had been married for about four years by then. Younger sibling: Kevin Quis was born in 1997.

1997-2008: Preschool, elementary, middle schooling in Penn Yan, New York.

1997-Pres: Enrolled on and off in classical ballet training.

2001: Lansing’s parents get divorced.

2005 2 July: Lansing’s mother, Anita, died of cancer.

2005: Consciously rejected religion and declared herself an atheist.

2008-2012: Middle and high schooling in Lawrenceville, New Jersey. Participated and won several rounds of Poetry Out Loud in 2011 and again in 2012.

2009: Read Atlas Shrugged which gave words to already developing beliefs in atheism and capitalism.

2012-2016: College schooling in Washington, District of Columbia, majored in Literature: Creative Writing and Philosophy.

2012-2016: Student Library Assistant while studying in college.

2013 June: Ayn Rand Institute Intern where Lansing initially met her future first husband, then aged 25, in Irvine, California.

2013-2014: Completed Objectivist Academic Center course.

2016 3 September: Created website to self-publish three e-books that were primarily written throughout Lansing’s time in college: Metamorphosis: An Anthology of Poems; Unveiled: An Anthology of Nonfiction; Urgency: An Anthology of Short Stories.

2016 4 September: Completed her first novella Marginalia from the Snake Pit: A Novella and self-published it as an e-book after several rejections from publishers.

2016-2018: Receptionist at a law firm in D.C. and began proofreading business, Lansing Proofreading, LLC, in 2018.

2016 6 November: Lansing married and they lived together in D.C. before moving to Dubuque, Iowa.

2018-2021: Library Assistant at a public library in Dubuque, Iowa.

2020 18 January: Completed her first novel The Paper Pusher and self-published it through Lansing Press, LLC, after several rejections from publishers. Learned for the first time how to create and sell the novel in paperback, hardcover, e-book, and audiobook form. Promised herself, at that point, to continue self-publishing her own work, with or without the help of the modern-day publishing industry.

2020: Opened calligraphy business, Lansing Calligraphy, LLC.

2020 7 October: Lansing divorced after nearly four years of marriage.

2020: Met her future second husband, Ryan Bankson, then aged 32, at the public library where they both worked.

2022 22 January: Lansing married Ryan and they currently live in Dubuque, Iowa.

2021-Pres: Lansing went full-time freelance and began working on the first drafts of multiple novels.

2022 22 January: Merged three businesses into one, creating American Wordsmith, LLC.

2022 2 August: Completed her second novel The Dormant Age and self-published it through Lansing Press, LLC.

2022 6 September: Completed her third novel A Man of Silence and self-published it through Lansing Press, LLC.

2022 4 October: Completed her fourth novel A Man of Action and self-published it through Lansing Press, LLC.

***To be Continued***

_____________________________________________________________

My Favorite Time Period Timeline (1850-1906)

The books that are the most sacred to me are as follows: Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand, Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky, The Hunchback of Notre Dame by Victor Hugo, and Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë. Of course, there are many other pieces of work that I love, but these speak to my soul.

I noticed that most of these writers were from the late nineteenth century, and so I started to read more from that period, imagining that my literary mother was Ayn Rand and my literary father was Fyodor Dostoyevsky (what a pair!). I suppose my literary uncle could be Victor Hugo and my literary aunt Emily Brontë. With them alongside me, I noticed that from 1776 to 1850 (74 years) was about one generation since the birth of America.

I truly believe that my initial emotional response to first reading my favorite novels was a sign that the culture was better, healthier back then. Would I want to go back in time to live there? No, our lives are much better today than they ever were before; however, I think I am missing out on a more enriched cultural environment (and perhaps more people would have read my novels back then than now).

Based on some more thought about my favorite books, artwork, music, and overall esthetic, I realized that my favorite time period fell between 1850 and 1906. So, like you do, I made a timeline on Canva for a clearer picture:

1800-1850 = Romantic Era / 1850-1880 = Realism Era

1850 = Metal nibs and Copperplate calligraphy in use [Blacksmiths were still important throughout the 1800s; Bach lived and composed from 1685-1750]

1802-1885 = Victor Hugo’s birth and death; The Hunchback of Notre Dame was published in 1831

1837-1901 = Victorian Era [My esthetic]

1817-1898 = Indian Wars in the U.S.

1818-1848 = Emily Brontë’s birth and death; Wuthering Heights was published in 1847

1861-1865 = Civil War in the U.S.

1821-1881 = Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s birth and death; Crime and Punishment was published in 1866

1870-1914 = Second Industrial Revolution; First Industrial Revolution was from 1760-1840

1840-1893 = Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky’s birth and death; Swan Lake was composed in 1875 and performed in 1877

1849-1917 = John William Waterhouse’s birth and death; Lamia was created in 1905

1905-1982 = Ayn Rand’s birth and death; Atlas Shrugged was published in 1957 [The esthetic idea of Romantic Realism was created]

1906 = The Hartig House built [Queen Anne style architecture in the U.S. was popular from 1800-1900]

My Favorite Time Period Timeline (1850-1906)

I think it is extremely important for people to analyze if there is such a historical period that matches their own esthetic tastes because it reveals more about you as a person. With this new information, I will be devoting much more of my reading to that time period. And what is also great about an older period is that all of my primary sources will already be in the public domain, so I can find them for free on sites like gutenberg.org and archive.org.

I encourage you, too, to embrace the journey and learn more about yourself through history.

_____________________________________________________________

Literary Critique of Sally Rooney’s Normal People (Part I)

I picked up and put down Normal People by Sally Rooney multiple times as I came across it in my everyday life—at the bookstore, at the library, online. I had heard that she was a Marxist, and I could only roll my eyes and vow to never read her book.

But a few years after its first publication, I saw her top all the literary fiction lists and lauded as the voice of the millennial generation. I could hardly ignore someone who received such ravings and applause from what seemed like several thousands of fans. So, I borrowed the book from my local library and spent a weekend reading.

The following article will need to be in two parts: the first part concerning Rooney’s writing style and the second part concerning the story itself.

The very first thing to pop out at me was the use of dates for chapter headings. It begins with “January 2011” right on page 1. The readers now know that this text is time-sensitive and not evergreen like all good literary fiction should be. Please note that when I critique these style choices and techniques, it is not just found in this book but in most of the modern books of today, be they genre or literary fiction. Exact dates and times, like those found on all of our digital paper trails nowadays, erase the concept of reading a piece in any time period.

This brings me to another important point: I do not believe that Man and the values he requires to survive have changed. His emotions have not changed. That is why we can read ancient texts, like those of Plato and Aristotle, and still gain wisdom from them. They are not static pieces of text, which make no sense to us today. So, writing can be everlastingly relevant, and literary fiction, a form of fiction that teaches us what it means to be human, should be sensitive to such notions.

The next striking decision made by the author is that there are no quotation marks used at all in the book. The whole point of grammar is to make the reader stay with the story. It is the hidden mechanics of a piece well-written. Therefore, quotation marks are necessary to avoid confusion and pull the reader out of the story.

A single printing press traveled overseas from England to Massachusetts in 1638 and another arose in 1685. These presses printed mostly religious texts for their local communities. Colonial America began to publish more news-based books in 1728 when Benjamin Franklin began his own printing press. Since those early days of publishing, books were an enjoyable pastime for many a family.

But since the creation of the publishing industry, the roots were planted for today’s “Big Four” (Penguin Random House (1927), Macmillan (1843), Hachette Book Group (1826), and HarperCollins (1817)). By the end of the nineteenth century, the companies began publishing the likes of William James (1842-1910), James Joyce (1882-1941), William Faulkner (1897-1962), and Ernest Hemingway (1899-1961). All these writers, and many others, used James’s idea in psychology of “stream of consciousness” writing, where I believe grammar was first butchered and thrown to the wayside in favor of primal emotions cast upon the page. The authors took this theory to mean that our minds do not form complete sentences and that incomplete phrases are best for expressing our true inner experiences. Forget the structure of language and the reasons for its construction, these writers shout.

Though Sally Rooney and most modern writers do not go as far with the nonsensical writing as Joyce did, it is still common to see sentence fragments used for emphasis, much like in Hemingway’s writing. Ernest Hemingway used a mixture of sentence fragments and short telegraphic sentences. Rooney is similarly described for her “perfectly spare prose” (Goodreads blurb) in which this technique is still used. However, this type of prose used throughout a book strips it of its intended emphatic impact and renders the impact of the text overall immature.

Therefore, alongside this “modern” choice of skipping the quotation marks is also the author’s decision to slip in sentence fragments, like using “Yesterday” (2) to emphasize her points. Unfortunately, many more modern writers have bent the grammar rules like Hemingway, Faulkner, and Joyce. Perhaps poets more than novelists can get away with such playful uses of language, but for a story that is trying to delve into a serious study of character, I find that it, again, pulls the reader out of the story.

Another massively annoying technique used by every modern author I’ve read is the use of name-dropping. Brand names are tossed left and right, which to a modern audience may be understood, but in a decade will be lost on the readers. Rooney will require several footnotes at the end of her book for things like “Facebook” (4, 82, 170, 192 x2, 212, 232 x3), “MacBook” (21, 70), “Destiny’s Child remix” (32), “Kanye West song […] with the Curtis Mayfield sample” (40), “Aldi” (47), “Watch the Throne (74), “Vampire Weekend” (86), “Twitter” (100), “Skype” (191, 192, 222), “Evian bottle” (197), “Microsoft computer” (121), “Coke” (160, 229 x2), “White Lies song” (234), “PlayStation” (266), etcetera. I am only a few years younger and even I had to look some of these references up. That’s why I believe it is a good idea, especially in literary fiction, to never drop brand names. I know writers wish to give more detail and I even remember my creative writing teacher asking the class, “What kind of apple is it? Is it a Gala apple or a Red Delicious?” But for a reader, all they want to know is if it was a red apple, or if it was sweet, or bruised, it does not require a name for them to understand the point you are making as a writer. You can describe things with the senses, not by their brand names.

I also feel uncomfortable reading about characters texting, emailing, and online chatting because oftentimes the writer, as Rooney does, keeps the messages in their “original” forms, which usually means sentences that begin with the lower case, shorten words to letters, and generally misuse all forms of the English language. A novel is not meant to be a photograph of real life; it is an art form. An author does not have to choose to put in text messages as they look in real life, just as epistolary novels probably did not add the obvious spelling mistakes or scratched out sections in real letters they received. Art is all about omitting and shifting around things in real life to make it better, showing Man how the world ought to be—not how it is.

Instead, Rooney chooses to show her readers what the world is as she sees it, in the words of Hobbes’s Leviathan, as “nasty, brutish, and short.” Rooney emphasizes such ugliness by using curse words in her text, such as, “The economy’s fucked anyway” (21). I find that unless no other word would be better suited to that character, curse words should never be used. Being vulgar in literary fiction is unnecessary, lowly, and a cheap way to show character. I feel the same way about using clichés. There are better ways to explain a scene than just throwing around garbage words and seeing what moves the reader only after having a fit.

My final critique of the style choices this author made is her trickling throughout the book of her liberal ideology. Of course, I believe that this is the key to what got her published in the first place.

Allow me to list every obvious moment of liberalism and virtue signaling allowed to carry on throughout this book:

“school as an oppressive environment.” (12)
“He told her she should try reading The Communist Manifesto, he thought she would like it” (13, about Marxism)
The Fire Next Time (14, about racism)
The Golden Notebook (27, about feminism)
“It’s something to do with capitalism, she said.

“Yeah. Everything is, that’s the problem, isn’t it? she nodded.” (36)

“The communist Declan Bree. Connell, unprovoked, continued watching the road. We could do with a bit more communism in this country if you ask me, he said. From the corner of his eye he could see Lorraine smiling. Come on now, comrade, she said. I was the one who raised you with your good socialist values, remember? It’s true Lorraine has values. She’s interested in Cuba, and the cause of Palestinian liberation. In the end Connell did vote for Declan Bree, who went on to be eliminated in the fifth count. Two of the seats went to Fine Gael and the other to Sinn Féin. Lorraine said it was a disgrace. Swapping one crowd of criminals for another, she said. He texted Marianne: fg in government, fucks sake. She texted back: The party of Franco. He had to look up what that meant.” (48-9)
“reusable plastic bag” (52, 114)
“Critical Theory seminar” (69)
“Jesus, don’t tell me he’s involved in this Nazi thing, is he?” (82)
“Holocaust denier”; “white moderates” (83)
James Connolly & The Irish Trades Union Congress (87, Socialist Marxists)
“I wanted to try an open-relationship thing. […] Men can be possessive, she says.” (98)
“Generally I find men are a lot more concerned with limiting the freedoms of women than exercising personal freedom for themselves, says Marianne. […] I mean, when you look at the lives men are really living, it’s sad, Marianne says. They control the whole social system and this is the best they can come up with for themselves? They’re not even having fun.” (99)
“Would you rather live under a matriarchy? says Peggy. […] Don’t you enjoy your male privilege? she says.

“It’s like Marianne was saying, he replies. It’s not that enjoyable to have. I mean, it is what it is, I don’t get much fun out of it.

“Peggy gives a toothy grin. If I were a man, she says, I would have as many as three girlfriends. If not more.” (99)

“Time consists of physics, money is just a social construct. […] I don’t buy into the morality of work, she says. Some work maybe, but you’re just moving paper around an office, you’re not contributing to the human effort.” (112)
“May the revolution be swift and brutal.” (125)
“fascist”; “chauvinist pig” (144)
“Peggy thinks men are disgusting animals with no impulse control […]” (144)
“That’s money, the substance that makes the world real. There’s something so corrupt and sexy about it.” (166)
“Magdalene Laundry report”; “Denis O’Brien case” (173)
“The whole idea of “meritocracy” or whatever, it’s evil, you know I think that.” (180)
“Recycling bin” (256)

Now, there were some other more minor points made concerning class division and Connell wearing “Argos chic” clothes (151) and being a “milk-drinking culchie” (154), but those do not slap readers across the face as the other quotes above do.

Many of these topics concern the Left’s tribalistic love affair with topics like racism, feminism, and Marxism. Sally Rooney openly declares herself to be a Marxist, and it seems like that opened the doors to her publishing career.

End of Part I

_____________________________________________________________

On the Reader

I grew up with sensitive parents who each dealt with their own set of mental health difficulties. While I felt their love and affection during my key years of development, by seven, divorce shook my family to its core, and by eleven, death had riven it asunder. I would never be the same again and I was forced early on into the philosophical conundrum of asking “why?” Why did my mother have to die so young? Why do I deserve this suffering? Why can’t my family get along? Why is life so difficult?

Books became my way of searching for the “why” to life. It was the only way I knew how to do research. My parents both read and wrote, and so I became familiar early on with the concept of reading and escaping and learning and knowing through the page. I learned that reading and writing were my strengths throughout school as well.

That is why surface-level stories have not interested me since elementary school, when every book on the shelf felt like a gift or a piece of candy. But today, especially with so much out there, I do not have time for stories that are simply meant to entertain—not that there is anything immoral about them. But I have always wanted to learn how to be happy. I have always read literature with a purpose in mind, which is why I take it so seriously. How do I find happiness? I took the good and bad stories as a guide for what I should and should not do in order to be happy. And to do that, I had to judge.

I have learned so much more about humanity through literary fiction than any therapy session or movie or lecture in school. By asking myself why does the character behave that way, I can have a dialogue with the writer through their story. I can walk in those proverbial shoes of another human being to discover new things about myself and my own life story.

So there has always been this fire in my belly to know—to read and then compare that created world of the authors to my personal experience. Nothing will get you further in life than being honest with yourself first and foremost, and that it what I love the most about my parents. For I think they were each brutally honest with themselves and the world they lived in. I learned to never stray from taking an honest look at myself, which is what a writer must be: brutally honest with themselves and the world they live in.

Therefore, I hope that it has become clearer to you why I do not feel I have the time to read “genre fiction” but only “literary fiction.” It is not because I am being snobbish; it is because I need answers to live. If I didn’t have access to all the classics I have read thus far, then I may have suffocated a long time ago. For, you see, as a child who had no control over my external circumstances, something had to be under my control and I needed to know that life would get better and that I could make it so.

My reading and searching and effort paid off when I found the philosophy for living a happy life on earth, Ayn Rand’s Objectivism. It gave me the secular kind of morality that I was searching for and the control I craved to steer my newfound adult life into the light. She saved me from the gut-wrenching feeling I had whenever I left my humanities classes in high school but could never explain clearly. I was suffering from a public school system that rapidly became less about learning how this world works and more about how guilty I should feel for even breathing. The message of guilt only heightened in degree in college until I had to find more of a concrete link to Objectivism through the Ayn Rand Institute and all they had to offer.

High school and college life made me feel like that out-of-control child, where life was determined and I had to succumb to a fate where life was “nasty, brutish, and short” (Hobbes). I have felt existential dread before, but it was due to an entire educational system that, overall, refused to integrate. My supply of air was thinning out, and the anxiety beast inside of me rose up and fought to take over my life. After lots of therapy and medication and building up my adult life away from the school system, I am finally starting to feel like I am on stable ground again.

To me, good literature reveals truths about who we are as humans—from the best in us to the worst. In that sense, I agree with John Gardner who wrote On Moral Fiction. We need more moral fiction, not in the religious sense, but in the way that it can inspire and guide people toward virtue and against vice in order to attain happiness. Again, we have come to an age that no longer needs religion, but it most certainly still needs a moral code. Ayn Rand gave us a philosophical framework to live by such values but now, I believe, people need to see a barrage of examples of secular-based morality.

Sadly, people still believe that morality is inextricably linked to Judeo-Christian beliefs. But people must live according to the laws of reality or else they will die. And, again, going back to the Tolstoyan idea, there are essentially so many ways to die and only one way to live. Maybe that’s why reading books with tragic endings raises the hairs on our heads, because we are learning how to avoid death. At least, that is how seriously I take my reading and writing endeavors, and I hope you will too.

_____________________________________________________________

Informal.	Formal.
The Duke of ——	To His Grace the Duke of ——
The Duchess of ——	To Her Grace the Duchess of ——
The Marquis of ——	To the Most Honourable the Marquis of ——
The Marchioness of ——	To the Most Honourable the Marchioness of ——
The Earl of ——	To the Right Honourable the Earl of ——
The Countess of ——	To the Right Honourable the Countess of ——
The Viscount ——	The Right Honourable the Viscount ——
The Viscountess ——	The Right Honourable the Viscountess ——
Lord ——	The Right Honourable Lord —— or Baron ——
Lady ——	The Right Honourable Lady —— or Baroness—